How much code reuse is there? Really? I like design patterns as much as the next guy, but using design patterns effectively requires discipline. Unfortunately, most project managers aren't engineers/software developers. They can't see past a present project. I can't say I always blame them. Managing the development of a game is probably as hard as it gets. Secondly, documentation for UI intensive software like the average video game really needs more than use cases. I'd love to see a good book (on the level of Addison Wesley's object technology series or Fowler) that addresses these issues well.
I was going to post the same thing, but you beat me to it. Frankly, I got by using MySQL with an OReilly book (I could have skipped that) and the online documentation. Good online documentation can be enough if it's properly written. Organization and presentation are everything and MySQL, in my opinion, does the best job among OSS projects. (Yes, I even think PostgreSQL is the better database.)
Disclaimer: My only knowledge of HP really comes from having read a biography of the founders of the company. However, I believe HPs problems aren't too unique and symptomatic of the larger problems with corporate America.
HP was started by a couple of engineers in a garage. They were the typical Silicon Valley success story. HP, like most technology companies, rooted their sccuess in innovation. Certainly as companies grow they tend to innovate less. Carly Florina wasn't an engineer. She probably couldn't solder her way out of a paper bag. She probably made good business decisions (at least in a typical MBA sort of way) but she obviously didn't know how to manage scientists and engineers. In other words, she was good at corporate strategy, but bad at fostering innovation.
Kids actually used to learn something in school. I agree that the abuse of children (even draconian punishment for misbehavior) is barbaric. The problem is that it's pretty hard to pay someone else enough to take care of your kids. Of course, the fact they're paid slightly above minimum wage in some cases is horrorific.
Unfortunately, arguments like this always boil down to semantics. I think you could make the point that there's a difference between knowledge and wisdom. Knowledge is understanding of a particular physical domain. Wisdom is understanding of how best to live one's life. Certainly, in the acquisition of knowledge, especially if it wasn't easily gained, one could increase in wisdom as well.
Unfortunately, you extrapolate increases in war and poverty, but technology remains stagnant. Eventually, we will see a change in energy policy. Eventually the backs of oil companies will be broken because there will be no more oil. (What will Saudi Arabia be like when they run out of oil?) That's assuming someone doesn't see an opportunity to invent something beforehand. It's worth noting that XEROX started PARC out of fear that paper would someday become obsolete and PARC was possibly the greatest CS think tank of the last 50 years (perhaps Bell Labs and MIT's AI Lab could give them a run for that title).
I see many possible futures. I see a future where genetically engineered foods make famines a thing of the past. I see a future where robotics and nanotechology lower the cost of manufacturing down even further. Heck, I find it a tad ironic that a world-reknowned physicist doesn't see find any great hope for humanity through science. Maybe if he spent a little less time pondering the stars and a little more time working on other less-intractable problems in applied physics (quantum teleportation, cold fusion, nanotechnology, etc) he wouldn't be so down on humanity.
Public school is daycare! Let's just get that fact out into the open. I think most of Slashdot crowd easily understands this.
I've recently been watching the Linear Algebra, Introductory Physics, and Differential Equations courses from MIT's OCW. Wow! I'm actually left speechless by the quality of education these kids get. In the first lecture of the DiffEq course the professor stated that most of the students should have seen (and learned about) differential equations in high school.* If not, they could easily read the book and figure out what one was. That was his introduction. While I appreciate this lecture style now, I can assure you, I was vastly unprepared coming out of high school. I can also assure you that most of my high school math teachers would have trouble defining what a differential equation was. Is this sad -- yes.
How are kids supposed to take education seriously when this is the trash that we give them? Did I study in High School? No. I regret this now, only because I understand the role of 'busy work' in society. I really regret not dropping out, getting a GED, going to work, and signing up for courses at my local community college.** I would have learned so much more.
The first step in revolutionizing our education system is to let people know how worthless the present system really is. Let's just make sure everybody knows that little Johnny is getting screwed over by an inept public school system. Let's let Mr. and Mrs. Joe Sixpack chew on the fact that the modern day public school is really day care. Let's further emphasize that the modern day school has more to do with 'Lord of the Flies' than anybody care to admit. Let's expose the fact that our best and brightest avoid teaching jobs (especially at the HS level) like the plague. Let's remind them how poorly our kids do on education.
Only after we've addressed the real problems of our educational system, can we even begin to think about solving 'behavioral' problems. So, my advice to kids. You might as well bring your Gameboys, cell phones, and toys to school, because there's no point in trying in the modern day educational school system.
*Everybody sees differential equations when they first begin to study calculus. However, most students aren't really taught anything about them (not even a good definition) until they take an actual DiffEq course. **Incidentally, the state college system is starting to look more like the public school system everyday.
Yeah, Steve McConnell's book should be required reading for every project manager in IT. Of course, once they've read the book, they'll probably think they know as much as him, but that's another story.
If your having problems with elicting requirements you should really look at prototyping, even with paper or storyboards. Secondly, I hope as an ASP you aren't customizing your code for clients. I've seen that fail too much. Third, agile (iterative) methodologies require an understanding of the problem domain. As an ASP you have this. Also, agile methodologies require a concrete understanding of most (if not all) of the tools involved. I say this because you having to connect these iterations under the umbrella of a piece of software on the fly. Lastly, it requires a truly cohesive team with proper methodological discipline. You've got to have programmers who are conversant in the process and understand how to design code (even if it's just a module and even if they aren't the ones who design it). In short, I could see a truly iterative process work for an ASP, but in many situations the above criteria aren't feasible, thus making agile methodologies more of a risk than a boon.
If the scope, goals, or features were never clearly defined by managment, that there's a flaw in the requirements gathering process. That may not be much comfort to you now, but this really implies management error. There's only so much a programmer himself can do to fix this.
In a business to business transaction there's little to protect a client from a bad development shop. Once you're in more than half-way on a project, there's little a client can do to stop the bleeding. Sure, you could have internally managed the project well from day one, but you chose the lowest bidder (or at least made a compromise). Do you halt development? Most software shops aren't to eager to pick up the pieces of a unfinished project. Also, a project that is late or over budget is often looked at better than a unfinished project. So you keep going, lying to yourself that 'outsourcing' (even domestically) is a good thing. The software shop, trying to meet a budget or perhaps just being unscrupulous, 'rounds the edges' realizing they've got they're client over a barrel. Sure, it tends not to foster long term relationships, but that's business*.
*the big company anomaly: if your company has pedigree, this often isn't even a problem
Sports: First, if you're a woman you might have a different take on the sport thing. Secondly, cheerleaders aren't there to lead cheers. Third, a male sports commentator can look like a horses end, but a female sports reporter tends to be attractive. Fourth, those beer commercials that inundate your average sporting event sell sex by the boatload. Fifth, SI has a swimsuit issue, but I guess people read it for the articles. I could go on, but you get the idea.
War: War is greed -- greed for power. Power is sex.
As far as the war spam goes, you obviously don't get the 'Limbaugh Letter'.
Frankly, if I could guarantee 500 orders of a big ticket product, I'd go to the manufacturer and ask for the 'lucky' sales rep. Remember, Best Buy is the middle man.
You know there's a business plan in this somewhere!
Slashdot Mirror
How much code reuse is there? Really? I like design patterns as much as the next guy, but using design patterns effectively requires discipline. Unfortunately, most project managers aren't engineers/software developers. They can't see past a present project. I can't say I always blame them. Managing the development of a game is probably as hard as it gets. Secondly, documentation for UI intensive software like the average video game really needs more than use cases. I'd love to see a good book (on the level of Addison Wesley's object technology series or Fowler) that addresses these issues well.
I was going to post the same thing, but you beat me to it. Frankly, I got by using MySQL with an OReilly book (I could have skipped that) and the online documentation. Good online documentation can be enough if it's properly written. Organization and presentation are everything and MySQL, in my opinion, does the best job among OSS projects. (Yes, I even think PostgreSQL is the better database.)
I believe his first wife was a classmate of his. While she may not be as famous as her husband, she did earn a physics degree from ETH Zurich.
Albert-László Barabási is a tenured endowed professorship at Notre Dame. I don't think he's one step away from cleaning gutters.
What would be really sad is if they do some sort of calculations in a computer to analyze the results.
That's pretty much what theoretical physicists do anyways.
Disclaimer: My only knowledge of HP really comes from having read a biography of the founders of the company. However, I believe HPs problems aren't too unique and symptomatic of the larger problems with corporate America.
HP was started by a couple of engineers in a garage. They were the typical Silicon Valley success story. HP, like most technology companies, rooted their sccuess in innovation. Certainly as companies grow they tend to innovate less. Carly Florina wasn't an engineer. She probably couldn't solder her way out of a paper bag. She probably made good business decisions (at least in a typical MBA sort of way) but she obviously didn't know how to manage scientists and engineers. In other words, she was good at corporate strategy, but bad at fostering innovation.
Kids actually used to learn something in school. I agree that the abuse of children (even draconian punishment for misbehavior) is barbaric. The problem is that it's pretty hard to pay someone else enough to take care of your kids. Of course, the fact they're paid slightly above minimum wage in some cases is horrorific.
Geeze, I never thought a Pink Floyd song would actually be prophetic.
Unfortunately, arguments like this always boil down to semantics. I think you could make the point that there's a difference between knowledge and wisdom. Knowledge is understanding of a particular physical domain. Wisdom is understanding of how best to live one's life. Certainly, in the acquisition of knowledge, especially if it wasn't easily gained, one could increase in wisdom as well.
Unfortunately, you extrapolate increases in war and poverty, but technology remains stagnant. Eventually, we will see a change in energy policy. Eventually the backs of oil companies will be broken because there will be no more oil. (What will Saudi Arabia be like when they run out of oil?) That's assuming someone doesn't see an opportunity to invent something beforehand. It's worth noting that XEROX started PARC out of fear that paper would someday become obsolete and PARC was possibly the greatest CS think tank of the last 50 years (perhaps Bell Labs and MIT's AI Lab could give them a run for that title).
I see many possible futures. I see a future where genetically engineered foods make famines a thing of the past. I see a future where robotics and nanotechology lower the cost of manufacturing down even further. Heck, I find it a tad ironic that a world-reknowned physicist doesn't see find any great hope for humanity through science. Maybe if he spent a little less time pondering the stars and a little more time working on other less-intractable problems in applied physics (quantum teleportation, cold fusion, nanotechnology, etc) he wouldn't be so down on humanity.
Public school is daycare! Let's just get that fact out into the open. I think most of Slashdot crowd easily understands this.
I've recently been watching the Linear Algebra, Introductory Physics, and Differential Equations courses from MIT's OCW. Wow! I'm actually left speechless by the quality of education these kids get. In the first lecture of the DiffEq course the professor stated that most of the students should have seen (and learned about) differential equations in high school.* If not, they could easily read the book and figure out what one was. That was his introduction. While I appreciate this lecture style now, I can assure you, I was vastly unprepared coming out of high school. I can also assure you that most of my high school math teachers would have trouble defining what a differential equation was. Is this sad -- yes.
How are kids supposed to take education seriously when this is the trash that we give them? Did I study in High School? No. I regret this now, only because I understand the role of 'busy work' in society. I really regret not dropping out, getting a GED, going to work, and signing up for courses at my local community college.** I would have learned so much more.
The first step in revolutionizing our education system is to let people know how worthless the present system really is. Let's just make sure everybody knows that little Johnny is getting screwed over by an inept public school system. Let's let Mr. and Mrs. Joe Sixpack chew on the fact that the modern day public school is really day care. Let's further emphasize that the modern day school has more to do with 'Lord of the Flies' than anybody care to admit. Let's expose the fact that our best and brightest avoid teaching jobs (especially at the HS level) like the plague. Let's remind them how poorly our kids do on education.
Only after we've addressed the real problems of our educational system, can we even begin to think about solving 'behavioral' problems. So, my advice to kids. You might as well bring your Gameboys, cell phones, and toys to school, because there's no point in trying in the modern day educational school system.
*Everybody sees differential equations when they first begin to study calculus. However, most students aren't really taught anything about them (not even a good definition) until they take an actual DiffEq course.
**Incidentally, the state college system is starting to look more like the public school system everyday.
[Sarcasm on]
3. Kill the business owners with poor business plans and unrealistic expectations.
[Sarcasm off]
Yeah, Steve McConnell's book should be required reading for every project manager in IT. Of course, once they've read the book, they'll probably think they know as much as him, but that's another story.
If your having problems with elicting requirements you should really look at prototyping, even with paper or storyboards. Secondly, I hope as an ASP you aren't customizing your code for clients. I've seen that fail too much. Third, agile (iterative) methodologies require an understanding of the problem domain. As an ASP you have this. Also, agile methodologies require a concrete understanding of most (if not all) of the tools involved. I say this because you having to connect these iterations under the umbrella of a piece of software on the fly. Lastly, it requires a truly cohesive team with proper methodological discipline. You've got to have programmers who are conversant in the process and understand how to design code (even if it's just a module and even if they aren't the ones who design it). In short, I could see a truly iterative process work for an ASP, but in many situations the above criteria aren't feasible, thus making agile methodologies more of a risk than a boon.
If the scope, goals, or features were never clearly defined by managment, that there's a flaw in the requirements gathering process. That may not be much comfort to you now, but this really implies management error. There's only so much a programmer himself can do to fix this.
There's nothing wrong with these articles in themselves. It's only when these strategies are planned from day one that this becomes a problem.
because 'nobody' will 'see' it....
In a business to business transaction there's little to protect a client from a bad development shop. Once you're in more than half-way on a project, there's little a client can do to stop the bleeding. Sure, you could have internally managed the project well from day one, but you chose the lowest bidder (or at least made a compromise). Do you halt development? Most software shops aren't to eager to pick up the pieces of a unfinished project. Also, a project that is late or over budget is often looked at better than a unfinished project. So you keep going, lying to yourself that 'outsourcing' (even domestically) is a good thing. The software shop, trying to meet a budget or perhaps just being unscrupulous, 'rounds the edges' realizing they've got they're client over a barrel. Sure, it tends not to foster long term relationships, but that's business*.
*the big company anomaly: if your company has pedigree, this often isn't even a problem
Actually, no.
Sports:
First, if you're a woman you might have a different take on the sport thing. Secondly, cheerleaders aren't there to lead cheers. Third, a male sports commentator can look like a horses end, but a female sports reporter tends to be attractive. Fourth, those beer commercials that inundate your average sporting event sell sex by the boatload. Fifth, SI has a swimsuit issue, but I guess people read it for the articles. I could go on, but you get the idea.
War:
War is greed -- greed for power. Power is sex.
As far as the war spam goes, you obviously don't get the 'Limbaugh Letter'.
Laws are only as good as the people who enforce them.
I'm also guessing he probably wasn't too concerned about taking care of himself either.
Would taking a evening course (or a quick weekend 'short course') at a community college qualify you?
So what was so bad about Microsoft?
Frankly, if I could guarantee 500 orders of a big ticket product, I'd go to the manufacturer and ask for the 'lucky' sales rep. Remember, Best Buy is the middle man.
You know there's a business plan in this somewhere!